Literature DB >> 33727261

Prognostic Value of ER and PgR Expression and the Impact of Multi-clonal Expression for Recurrence in Ductal Carcinoma in situ: Results from the UK/ANZ DCIS Trial.

Mangesh A Thorat1,2,3, Pauline M Levey4, J Louise Jones5, Sarah E Pinder2,6, Nigel J Bundred7,8, Ian S Fentiman, Jack Cuzick9.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The prognostic value of estrogen receptor (ER)/progesterone receptor (PgR) expression in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is unclear. We observed multi-clonality when evaluating ER/PgR expression in the UK/ANZ DCIS trial, therefore, we investigated the prognostic role of both uni-clonal and multi-clonal ER/PgR expression in DCIS. EXPERIMENTAL
DESIGN: Formalin-fixed paraffin embedded tissues were collected from UK/ANZ DCIS trial participants (n = 755), and ER/PgR expression was evaluated by IHC in 181 cases (with recurrence) matched to 362 controls by treatment arm and age. Assays were scored by the Allred method and by a newly devised clonal method-analyses categorizing multi-clonal DCIS as ER/PgR-positive as per current practice (Standard) and as ER/PgR-negative (clonal) were performed.
RESULTS: ER expression was multi-clonal in 11% (39/356) of ER-positive (70.6%, 356/504) patients. Ipsilateral breast event (IBE) risk was similarly higher in ER-multi-clonal and ER-negative DCIS as compared with DCIS with uni-clonal ER expression. ER-negative DCIS (clonal) had a higher risk of in situ IBE [OR 4.99; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.66-9.36; P < 0.0001], but the risk of invasive IBE was not significantly higher (OR 1.72; 95% CI, 0.84-3.53; P = 0.14), P heterogeneity = 0.03. ER was an independent predictor in multivariate analyses (OR 2.66; 95% CI, 1.53-4.61). PgR status did not add to the prognostic information provided by ER.
CONCLUSIONS: ER expression is a strong predictor of ipsilateral recurrence risk in DCIS. ER-positive DCIS with distinct ER-negative clones has a recurrence risk similar to ER-negative DCIS. ER should be routinely assessed in DCIS, and ER scoring should take clonality of expression into account. ©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33727261      PMCID: PMC7611296          DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-20-4635

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Cancer Res        ISSN: 1078-0432            Impact factor:   12.531


  25 in total

1.  Implications of inconsistent measurement of ER status in non-invasive breast cancer: a study of 1,684 cases from the Sloane Project.

Authors:  Jeremy Thomas; Andrew Hanby; Sarah Pinder; Ian Ellis; James Macartney; Karen Clements; Gill Lawrence; Hugh Bishop
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2008 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.431

2.  Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up†.

Authors:  F Cardoso; S Kyriakides; S Ohno; F Penault-Llorca; P Poortmans; I T Rubio; S Zackrisson; E Senkus
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 32.976

3.  Biologic features and prognosis of ductal carcinoma in situ are not adversely impacted by initial large body mass.

Authors:  Henry M Kuerer; Sara A Lari; Banu K Arun; Chung-Yuan Hu; Abenaa Brewster; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Constance T Albarracin; Gildy V Babiera; Abigail S Caudle; Jamie L Wagner; Jennifer K Litton; Isabelle Bedrosian; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Anthony Lucci; Kelly K Hunt
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2012-03-04       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  Biomarker expression and risk of subsequent tumors after initial ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosis.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske; Annette M Molinaro; Mona L Gauthier; Hal K Berman; Fred Waldman; James Bennington; Henry Sanchez; Cynthia Jimenez; Kim Stewart; Karen Chew; Britt-Marie Ljung; Thea D Tlsty
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Cell biological factors in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast-relationship to ipsilateral local recurrence and histopathological characteristics.

Authors:  A Ringberg; L Anagnostaki; H Anderson; I Idvall; M Fernö
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 6.  Tumor characteristics as predictors of local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Shi-Yi Wang; Tatyana Shamliyan; Beth A Virnig; Robert Kane
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-02-15       Impact factor: 4.872

7.  Comparison of different antibodies for detection of progesterone receptor in breast cancer.

Authors:  Michael Press; Betsy Spaulding; Susan Groshen; David Kaminsky; Margaret Hagerty; Lori Sherman; Kurt Christensen; Dean P Edwards
Journal:  Steroids       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.668

8.  Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing.

Authors:  Marco Gerlinger; Andrew J Rowan; Stuart Horswell; James Larkin; David Endesfelder; Eva Gronroos; Pierre Martinez; Nicholas Matthews; Aengus Stewart; Charles Swanton; M Math; Patrick Tarpey; Ignacio Varela; Benjamin Phillimore; Sharmin Begum; Neil Q McDonald; Adam Butler; David Jones; Keiran Raine; Calli Latimer; Claudio R Santos; Mahrokh Nohadani; Aron C Eklund; Bradley Spencer-Dene; Graham Clark; Lisa Pickering; Gordon Stamp; Martin Gore; Zoltan Szallasi; Julian Downward; P Andrew Futreal
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 9.  American Society of Clinical Oncology/College Of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer.

Authors:  M Elizabeth H Hammond; Daniel F Hayes; Mitch Dowsett; D Craig Allred; Karen L Hagerty; Sunil Badve; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Glenn Francis; Neil S Goldstein; Malcolm Hayes; David G Hicks; Susan Lester; Richard Love; Pamela B Mangu; Lisa McShane; Keith Miller; C Kent Osborne; Soonmyung Paik; Jane Perlmutter; Anthony Rhodes; Hironobu Sasano; Jared N Schwartz; Fred C G Sweep; Sheila Taube; Emina Emilia Torlakovic; Paul Valenstein; Giuseppe Viale; Daniel Visscher; Thomas Wheeler; R Bruce Williams; James L Wittliff; Antonio C Wolff
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-04-19       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Predictors for local invasive recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xining Zhang; Hongji Dai; Ben Liu; Fengju Song; Kexin Chen
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.497

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Subtype-Specific Tumour Immune Microenvironment in Risk of Recurrence of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Prognostic Value of HER2.

Authors:  Julia Solek; Jedrzej Chrzanowski; Adrianna Cieslak; Aleksandra Zielinska; Dominika Piasecka; Marcin Braun; Rafal Sadej; Hanna M Romanska
Journal:  Biomedicines       Date:  2022-05-03

2.  Prognostic and Predictive Value of HER2 Expression in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Results from the UK/ANZ DCIS Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Mangesh A Thorat; Pauline M Levey; J Louise Jones; Sarah E Pinder; Nigel J Bundred; Ian S Fentiman; Jack Cuzick
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 12.531

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.